Careers

Experiences

Industries

Offices

Our Firm

Pages

Our People

Updates

Practices

Home - Warner Norcross + Judd LLP

In <a href="http://publicdocs.courts.mi.gov:81/SCT/PUBLIC/ORDERS/154776_54_01.pdf">Ozimek v Rodgers, No. 154776</a>, the Michigan Supreme Court granted mini-oral argument as to whether an order denying the plaintiff mother’s motion to change the school was “a postjudgment order affecting the custody of a minor” and therefore a “final order” under MCR 7.202(6)(a)(iii).  The mini-oral argument is scheduled to occur in the same session when the Court will hear oral argument in <a href="http://www.wnj.com/Blogs/Appellate/February-2017/MSC-grants-MOAA-on-whether-a-court%E2%80%99s-postjudgment">Marik v Marik, No. 154549</a>. 
  
To view our previous post on the Court of Appeals’ decision, <a href="https://www.wnj.com/Blogs/Appellate/August-2016/COA-holds-that-order-denying-a-motion-to-chang-(1)">click here</a>.

core/freeform

Associate

Ashley G. Chrysler

Labor and Employment

MSC grants second MOAA on whether an order denying a motion to change schools is a postjudgment order affecting the custody of a minor

The Warner Norcross + Judd LLP lawyer responsible for the contents of our advertising and this website is managing partner <a href="/people/mark-j-wassink/" aria-label="Mark Wassink">Mark Wassink</a> who can be reached at <a href="mailto:mwassink@wnj.com" aria-label="email Mark Wassink">mwassink@wnj.com</a> or 616.752.2189. Please read our full <a href="/privacy-policy/" aria-label="see privacy policy">privacy policy</a> available on our website.

MSC grants second MOAA on whether an order denying a motion to change schools is a postjudgment order affecting the custody of a minor

professionals